Here is the CNN link.Why is Holder refusing to be asked questions about the wire tapping Why is he hiding,?

1. It wasn't wire tapping, it was a subpoena to review the phone records, not a wire tape to listen to conversations.

2. Holder did the responsible thing, when a public official has a conflict of interest in a particular case they recuse themselves and allow someone else to make the decisions. Holder recused himself and allowed a DAG to review and approve the subpoena. The article says nothing about him refusing to be asked questions.

So by posting your question you have proven two things. You don't know the meaning of "wire tapping" or "recused." Nice job making yourself look stupid.

There was once no wire tapping, the DOJ subpoenaed records referring to mobilephone calls between AP reporters and their sources considering they're attempting to determine how confidential information used to be leaked from the federal government concerning a foiled terror plot to assault a Us-certain aircraft in could 2012.　to claim wire tapping is being dishonest, if you're going to assault anyone as a minimum do so honestly.　And when you consider that when do conservatives rush to the help of the evil liberal media and press anyhow?

For those who are calling you a liar you posted a Fox site -- Good one! Would it be inconvenient to mention that it WASN'T WIRE TAPPING? It was collecting records of phone calls. The phone numbers and the length of the calls is all they have. Did you know that not all phone calls are recorded and even with those phone numbers there is not way to go back and find out what was actually said. Why is the right wing so consistently misinformed?

you don't know what any of these words mean, do you?

first off... he's "recused himself from making the DECISION IF THE DOD SHOULD GET THE RECORDS" because it's obviously got a conflict of interest...

that doesn't mean he won't be asked questions but that he didn't make the decision because he was already involved with the case, as the FBI already asked him questions before that decision was made...

do you understand any of this?

second it wasn't wire tapping but getting phone records... it wasn't listening in on the calls, but just seeing who was called...

So from FOX to Blog, your not going in the right direction. Also no law was broken. The subpoenas was legally obtained and signed for by a judge.

It's not wiretapping, you're flat out lying. Records subpoenaed does not mean wire tapping.

Well facts keep getting the way of all these scandals

He's hiding the truth, obviously.

He recused himself. That is the easy and less obvious way of taking the 5th amendment. I saw the interview.

Oh yeah...a BLOG post is so much better of a link. bahahaha